The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Toward a protein profile of Escherichia coli : Comparison to its transcription profile
Open accessAbstract
High-pressure liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry was used to obtain a protein profile of Escherichia coli strain MG1655 grown in minimal medium with glycerol as the carbon source. By using cell lysate from only 3 × 10 8 cells, at least four different tryptic peptides were detected for each of 404 proteins in a short 4-h experiment. At least one peptide with a high reliability score was detected for 986 proteins. Because membrane proteins were underrepresented, a second experiment was performed with a preparation enriched in membranes. An additional 161 proteins were detected, of which from half to two-thirds were membrane proteins. Overall, 1,147 different E. coli proteins were identified, almost 4 times as many as had been identified previously by using other tools. The protein list was compared with the transcription profile obtained on Affymetrix GeneChips. Expression of 1,113 (97%) of the genes whose protein products were found was detected at the mRNA level. The arithmetic mean mRNA signal intensity for these genes was 3-fold higher than that for all 4,300 protein-coding genes of E. coli . Thus, GeneChip data confirmed the high reliability of the protein list, which contains about one-fourth of the proteins of E. coli . Detection of even those membrane proteins and proteins of undefined function that are encoded by the same operons (transcriptional units) encoding proteins on the list remained low.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Quantitative analysis of complex protein mixtures using isotope-coded affinity tags
Gygi, S. P., Rist, B., Gerber, S. A., Turecek, F., Gelb, M. H., & Aebersold, R. (1999) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/13690 · Cited by 4,683
Identification of novel small RNAs using comparative genomics and microarrays
Wassarman, K. M., Repoila, F., Rosenow, C., Storz, G., & Gottesman, S. (2001) · Genes & Development · doi:10.1101/gad.901001 · Cited by 723
Cited by
Ishihama, Y., Oda, Y., Tabata, T., Sato, T., Nagasu, T., Rappsilber, J., & Mann, M. (2005) · Molecular & Cellular Proteomics · doi:10.1074/mcp.m500061-mcp200 · Cited by 2,055
GMD@CSB.DB: the Golm Metabolome Database
Kopka, J., Schauer, N., Krueger, S., Birkemeyer, C., Usadel, B., Bergmuller, E., Dormann, P., Weckwerth, W., Gibon, Y., Stitt, M., et al. (2005) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bti236 · Cited by 1,382
Global signatures of protein and mRNA expression levels
de Sousa Abreu, R., Penalva, L. O., Marcotte, E. M., & Vogel, C. (2009) · Molecular BioSystems · doi:10.1039/b908315d · Cited by 1,248
Lu, P., Vogel, C., Wang, R., Yao, X., & Marcotte, E. M. (2007) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1270 · Cited by 1,139
Proteomics in gram‐negative bacterial outer membrane vesicles
Lee, E., Choi, D., Kim, K., & Gho, Y. S. (2008) · Mass Spectrometry Reviews · doi:10.1002/mas.20175 · Cited by 339
Metadata
- Authors
- Corbin, R. W., Paliy, O., Yang, F., Shabanowitz, J., Platt, M., Lyons, C. E., Root, K., McAuliffe, J., Jordan, M. I., Kustu, S., Soupene, E., & Hunt, D. F.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2003-07-23
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- 16
- Pages
- 9232-9237
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2129617994
- Cited by
- 177
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 8.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Toward a protein profile of Escherichia coli : Comparison to its transcription profile. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.1533294100
- The paper
- Corbin, R. W., Paliy, O., Yang, F., Shabanowitz, J., Platt, M., Lyons, C. E., Root, K., McAuliffe, J., Jordan, M. I., Kustu, S., Soupene, E., & Hunt, D. F. (2003). Toward a protein profile of Escherichia coli : Comparison to its transcription profile. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1533294100
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.